David Ricardo's "The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation" (Part 1/3)

[@vphiameradisogaarwa]

Seriously - how does this not have 18,000 views.

[@unrequitedflowers6264]

Much appreciated, I’m reading part of this text for class and ur video helps a lot 🫡

[@billyhuang4945]

Absolute legend please keep up with vids. Could do JS Mill or The Marginal Revolution - Jevons?

[@xiaodongwang7753]

Great reading and analysis. But where’s the next one?

[@chindico]

Thanks for the great videos.

[@PilatePontius-py4td]

I Think Of WWJD And It Comes Down To You.Then There's That Peter Joseph Guy (TZM).

[@alexanderthedude5474]

first

[@lostintime519]

Labor is labor. What Kardashians are doing is not labor, but something to do with commercials. The wage isn't based on the amount of work you put into something but on the contribution = aftereffect. Problem solved. Don't be a postmodernist.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

What can a contribution look like?

[@duncanthehut]

I can't tell if you're proposing a solution to an analytical problem (which doesn't exist) or the problem of surplus-value extraction. If the former case is true, your proposition that wages are based on """contribution = aftereffect""" is contradicted by reality, viz. the fact that we live in a society built off of surplus-value. The entire point is that workers sell their potential for labor but in fact are offering up (in a "not-exchange" as Marx puts it in Grundrisse) their total capacity for work, be it mental and/or physical. Exploitation is the immanent contradiction between exchange and not-exchange. Now if this "contribution = aftereffect" is your solution, I have to say that you're no better than a capitalist. Value and "contribution = aftereffect" are both mystifications insofar that they present themselves as "evaluations" of labor, but face the immanent contradiction of not-evaluation. In a social revolution, this evaluation appearance is sublated off of the backs of the social arrangements of workers that practice not only not-evaluation, but also not-growth (in my opinion, this is the subordination of productive growth to reproductive growth). As hinted at in the previous parenthetical, the goal of a social revolution overturning capitalism is to subordinate production to reproduction. This "reproduction" would be of ourselves, the earth, &c, rather than reproduction around production as we see in capitalism.

[@phantomggg]

Attention Value is now a significant factor of consideration, not only our traditionally understood value of labor. The money paid to the kardashians is determined by the projected amount of consumers that will “pay attention” to the product due to the effectiveness of the celebrity to attract attention. The attention a celebrity may produce for any given product could be roughly calculated by referring to social media analytics and other relevant data such as views, clicks, mentions, traffic to websites, publicity in various media outlets, etc. Celebrities may not produce “real value” through the application of physical labor, but they effectively produce high “attention value” which may be converted to real value due to the real transactions that result from from the celebrity’s influence.